"Michael Brennan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, I have tried the latest kernels from both 2.4 and 2.6 now and > I found that 2.4 does not work while 2.6 works fine. > > I did some research about it and looks like we're not suppose to use >> O_DIRECT but madvice or posix_fadvice.
They have problems, too: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.coreutils.bugs/9968/focus=9982 I have to admit that O_DIRECT has been a big hassle. > What is the main reason this non-buffering mechanism is used in parted? > Is it for performance? Or something other, like reducing the risk of > corrupting data? > The other partitioning tools I've used seem to use normal write operations > and then sync the disks right afterwards, on the other hand, they only write > the partition table to disk and does not have the advanced features parted > has. I don't know -- I wasn't involved with parted back then. Maybe Leslie (Cc'd) can say? _______________________________________________ parted-devel mailing list parted-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/parted-devel
